Jesus Fucked Guys to Show them the Kingdom

>Immediately throw shitfit because of "muh Christcucks"
>Gets called out on it
>Gets butthurt

Attached: 1490476050856.jpg (474x484, 92K)

>And the strong shall find no confidence in power: the naked shall flee away in that day, says the Lord.
Amos 2:16

How are there Christians on this site? I want to know this. It fucking boggles my mind. Christians even using the internet at all outside Facebook is funny to me.

I’m a Muslim

I have a hard time with this as well. If you think of all the shitty contributions here (Peterson, Aristotle, Capitalist trickle down bullshit, the shitty political aspects of Evola and others like him (there are good parts of them, but some of their political work is beyond ridiculous in our day), and the type of bigoted xenophobic posting that comes around here on Friday and Saturday nights when polcunts are trying to compensate for their weekend loneliness by feeling productive by exchanging words with people that read books) come from christfucks. Personally, I am cool with Christianity, and I think there’s are some cool Christian writers, but anyone that proselytizes here, or is generally forthcoming with their Christian convictions really provides us with all of the speedbumps we encounter in our attempts to have good discussion. The fact of the matter is that if there were a Christian Lit and a less Christian Lit, the Christian lit would die off because it would be an unoriginal, literally idiotic (in the Greek sense of the word) echo chamber that, it would turn out, requires the foil of argument with rationally-minded folks to maintain interest in conversation. So what I propose is going ahead and making the division. God, that would be nice.

Wrong. I’m glad you said something about this. Those most certainly do NOT come from Christians, those come from social Darwinists.

The Christians/Muslims on Veeky Forums are heavily accepting of race/gender, almost to a fault, but the reason you see that other stupid shit posted is because they’re Darwinists.

Oh. Ok.

Attached: 7C22DA74-9573-46C8-B3D1-36E1BC478F77.jpg (364x3519, 250K)

I don’t know exactly what this picture is trying to prove, but that guy is an idiot for liking Austrian Economics.

He is smart for dismissing Scientism. These two USUALLY go hand in hand on this site. I see a lot of religious interest coupled with a genuine interest in the practical, rational idea of complex social mechanics and economics.

And to expand, I usually see the atheists unironically in this site reading Dawkins or Dennitt and Darwin of course, and The Bell Curve, and Thomas Sowell

that seems to imply the kid was naked to the Gnosis, not that they had sex
the Gnostics were half Greek-Syrian-Egyptian, and half Jewish
this is correct
lol at you
this is halfwit rambling, keep your 12 year old thoughts to yourself

as for the OP, i’ve heard homo shit about gnosticism, but yet to see any proof at all

How should I interpret Matthew 12:31-32?

Read the Nag Hammadi.

gnosis.org/naghamm/nhlcodex.html

t. American

>There's a reason He called them the "Synagogue of Satan" and "Brood of Vipers"
and that reason is "Satan" means accuser, or adversary. the Jews (who gathered in synagogues), were accusers and adversaries of the early Christians.

biblehub.com/hebrew/7854.htm

I swear you idiots don't know anything about anything.

yeah. Big fucking surprise that a religion founded by catamite-keeping Greeks and attended by anti-natalist Gnostics would be into boy love. It's just one of those things that fell away because of Roman norms. Even the OT says be fruitful and multiply. Simple fact is cults that don't reproduce don't survive.

This has nothing to do with the gnostic gospels. Just because something is not church doctrine does not mean that it is gnostic. The earliest sources place mark’s author in Alexandria, Clement’s hometown. This text offers the most reasonable explanation for the appearance of the naked boy that shed the linen cloth in Mark’s gospel. The secret gospel of Mark was not some other document complete in itself, it was the complete version of Mark’s gospel that filled in the many complete gaps that are present in our current version of Mark’s gospel.

All you people disrespecting the Lord Jesus Christ need to repent. You all are in danger of hell fire for all these false accusations against your savior.

Paul said that nobody should reproduce. He said that if you are too weak to be single and if you are already married, then be married, otherwise you should stay single and certainly not reproduce

What's the citation on that? I don't remember it.

And: what was Paul's original name, before his conversion away from Judaism? and where was he from? and what was his occupation?

That works under the assumption that Jesus fucking a dude would be seen as a negative thing by Jesus. Otherwise, you should be wary of Hell fire for distorting the words in the real gospel of Mark. Hell was invented by Jews in the second century BCE to explain why their people were experiencing so much hardship on earth.

it doesn’t say what OP wants it to at all, it just says he spent the night listening to Christ lecture on the hidden gospel, which is common in esoteric traditions like Platonism and Hermeticism. Anything that teaches a secret Christ gnosis is gnosticism user, the Church vehemently denies the need for Gnosis because you wouldn’t have to suck off priests or read the bible if it existed
you’re going to hell
i have, and have it saved on my phone and browser bookmarks user

Not as long as you don't blaspheme against the holy spirit!
also
>there are people who take the idea of hell fire literally
>there are people who believe god is literally going to hold them responsible for their sins in a divine court
>there are people who refuse to think for themselves because they don't want to 'lose their faith'
>there are people who become afraid of the divine truth because of religion, rather than finding it through it
The absolute state of Christianity

1 Cor. 7
Now to the unmarried[a] and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. 9 But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
His name was Saul I believe. His teacher who showed him the ropes with regard to his new profession was from Alexandria, hence he was privy to the type of Christianity displayed in OP’s pic

Precisely. And thanks for the cite. It's good advice even today, when people are still living for their own pleasure, and paycheck to paycheck. Not a situation to bring a child into the world, at all.

Let’s examine the evidence: Clement was responding to a letter that was asking if Jesus had sex with guys. That context alone should lead you to reason. Then, ‘he insisted that Jesus might be with him’, this is how sexual supplications were phrased in that day. Why would the author then include that the boy was only wearing linen over his naked body? And then mention that he stayed with him all night to show him the mystery of the kingdom? You are astoundingly obstinate, deceitful, or plain stupid.

Does this settle your uncertainty?

Bait accepted! Hook, line, and sinker!

I think there is no value in what you have said